Explains AA NA CA SA MA. All those 12 step religious programs that is the new religion across the world. But its members become more and more deluded as time passes.
This was never more obvious to people that are critical thinkers than during the COVID pandemonium 🙂 Very conspicuous example of hysteria taking hold of masses of people globally, with hysterical consequences like the run on toilet paper in Australia, then London. Of course it quickly decended into worse outcomes like lockdowns and ridiculous mask wearing, then arresting kids for having snowball fights and fining them 10,000 pounds for it.....
Dr Richard Dawkins, I have become an atheist and learned to look at evidence when forming my beliefs and opinions because of you . And suddenly the world started making so much more sense . I am sure there are many more like me who you helped. Your life's work is certainly not a waste . Thank you so much for speaking
Yes, me too but I did that at age 15 when the preacher's sermon rattled my brain enough for me to reject the notion of religion ! Slava Dawkins, Slava Ukraini !
I used to be a Jehovah's witness. I left in 2014 and since then I have read almost all of Dawkins books. They are my golden collection. I outgrew God and got rid of the God Delusion.
Im glad you got out of that cult, but sorry to say that you never had God And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 1 John 5:11-12 KJV I can understand your pain of growing up in restrictive religious environment.. it really kills the desire to really know God, but he is still there for you just ask in the name of Jesus Christ and you will receive.
Professor Dawkins, what a privilege to have met you. Not only have you taught me so much, but I also experience profound serenity and contentment when I watch you and listen to you. I'll be forever grateful.
Darwinian Evolutionary Religion does not belong in the science classroom as it is a contested ideology, it is far from being a fact of science. We should stand up against things we consider to be harmful and troublesome to the health of a nation. Darwinian religion taught as a fact to students is a back door to promoting alsorts of immoral behaviour! It encourages perverse sexual orientations which have always been around throughout the centuries. It sears the consciences of many concerning right and wrong. It promote theft, gambling, adultery, lying, violence and murder etc. If there is no God to answer too for our words and actions, why bother to behave! Sin takes peace away from the earth and replaces it with anarchy, chaos and confusion. When sin gets out of control then curfews will be imposed upon the populace. The nations of the world have rejected the loving words of Jesus to their own detriment. Jesus said love God with all of your heart, [and God is a spirit which you cannot see, but you can get to a place where you feel his power and presence in the temple of your body] and love your neighbour as your self. What is there not to understand? And what is there not to love about Jesus? All the denominations we have today are not the Lord's will, they bring confusion to those who are seeking to know Jesus and understand his teachings. Every idle word spoken by preachers that does not line up with the teachings of Jesus shall be condemned on the day of judgment. Just as many of the Pharisees and Sadducees shall be condemned as they would not adhere to the loving commandments of Jesus. Many refused to repent after the death are resurrection of Jesus. An angel descended from heaven whose countenance was like lightening and for fear of him the Roman soldiers fled the scene and some of them reported back and told the Sanhedrin what had really happened. They gave them large summons of money to the soldiers in order for them to tell a lie, saying his disciples came by night and stole his body away. They said to the soldiers, if what really happened comes to Pilates ears, we will persuade him and secure you. Suppression of the truth still goes on today regarding the insurmountable evidence against evolution. At all costs, they must suppress, ignore and disregard all evidences against evolution, they must protect the sacred cow of their religion. Jesus predicted all this during his ministry right up to the end of this present age.
So glad that you have found contentment and serenity - those are gifts from God which is ironic that you attribute them to RD. Keep searching - eventually RD too will disappoint you. Our hearts are restless until they find God (St Augustine) - the only one who does not disappoint. Peace to you. :-)
I am an atheist. Women should not give up their rights to men who are deluded into thinking they are not in the right body. It is women's language that is under attack and it is women's rights also undermined, not men's in trans ideology. Women should not give way because a man is deluded. Biological facts should matter more than hurt feelings. Trans ideology is the new religion. Language, meaning and definitions matter. It is for this reason I do not go down the pronoun falacy depended on feelings.
The bitter irony is that it is women who are leading the attack on women's language and women's rights. The majority of people supporting and pushing gender woo are young women, sadly. The boom in gender clinics is driven by young women showing up because they want to become men.
@@MyPronounIsGoddess I highly doubt he believes you can "earn" the ability to change sex. I'm not sure what he said, that you're referring to, but you seem to imply, that maybe he thinks that "10 year effort" is evidence the man is SINCERE in "wanting to be a woman" (whatever that means)? And that he thinks that SINCERITY deserves a degree of respect? Personally, I'm pretty hardline on the "gender" stuff- I will ONLY use sex-correct pronouns, and to me "woman" and "man" are strictly defined by sex- Zero exceptions. ...but there WAS a time, when I still swallowed the "whats the harm?" narrative, and used wrong-sex pronouns for people who self-ID as trans, "to be polite"... Me being 'peaked' was a gradual process, that took time- And I think that's the case for most people, who start from a position of seeing transgenderism as part of the "LGBT", who they're used to supporting. Give him time, maybe 6 months or a year (or maybe significantly less), and I'll bet money he'll end up with the same universal rejection of the ENTIRE ideology. But he's only just recently STARTED talking about this topic, in any depth- I don't think it's surprising he's probably going through the same GRADUAL process of being 'peaked', as most critics of "gender" ideology do... But the fact that he's BEING critical of it, AT ALL makes me think that TOTAL rejection of the WHILE ideology will come sooner, rather than later. The last thing we need, as critics of "gender" nonsense, is to have the same zero-tolerance for ANY diversity of opinion, or for changing beliefs, that the PRO-"gender" ideologues enforce so zealously...
Proof that some atheists are not immune to stylized complex propaganda. Do you realize how much money has been spent on anti-trans think tanks over the past decade by groups on the far right and how so many on the left also have the wrong takes on trans matters? Meanwhile many trans youth and adults in the USA and other countriesare begging politicians not to take away their healthcare and right to exist in public, sounds "all powerful" right? Do you realize biology is an extremely complex subject way to complicated for the average layperson who attended high school 101 to comprehend, oversimplification of biology only serves to maintain patriarchal authoritarian control of the masses by enforcing by law the idea of the gender binary for all based on sex observed at birth. Do you even understand why supporting the authoritarian fascist regime in Russia declaring lgbt folk "enemies of the state" and "a danger to women and children" is being on the wrong side of history? Just because of what you believed to be a democratic nation in the past? If being trans is "a religion" rather than a medical condition that has been used by bad faith wealthy opportunists as a wedge issue to in turn attack the queer community and pass draconian laws to eradicate a micro minorities freedom of expression and right to exist in public, as a Trojan horse to normalize/soft sell fascist ideology to eventually attack all lgbq rights. then women's rights to bodily autonomy after that. FYI; Pronouns have always been in the dictionary and used daily whether you realize it or it hurts your feelings to show common decency to others.
@@baconsarny-geddon8298they will try to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and that will be us gays who have been around forever. I think there is some chance the ideology was reinforced as a means of controlled opposition to try to associate gays, lesbians and bisexuals and disenfranchise them and associate them with absurdity.
Dawkins is wonderful, thankfully I got pulled out of religious thinking by his work, and important thing is to become rational and apply it across the board...
Well, rationality is important to SOME, but it's not like it's required by nature or anything. Nature doesn't care whether we pursue truth or not. It doesn't even care if we continue to evolve and survive.
Being 'woke' originally was about being aware of racism is all its forms, not just the more obvious KKK style. It has since expanded to being aware of discrimination in many forms. Sexuality is one that I do not see as problematic to be 'woke' about - people are literally attracted to people of the same sex, there isn't really any doubt about that from reasonable people. Trans ideology, on the other hand, is essentially a neo-religion wanting to be forced upon people, whether they believe it or not - with really dangerous laws being passed to accomodate this, including indoctrinating children. The 'woke' argument being made here has taken a wrong turn - it shouldn't even be thought of as woke to promote the desires of a religion in the first place. The problem isn't 'woke', the problem is the trojan horse that has passed through the gates.
i think it is just, a fad. get used to it. imagine the variety as biological and genetic engineering progress at a speed we are just not ready for. we are going to become human machine bio hybrids in our lifetime. sooner than we thought for sure. they can make lab mice have purple hair or glow on the dark. Brace yourself for body modification gone wild!
The scientific method should be taught in high schools across the world, then this problem is solved in a generation. Most people do not have the critical thinking skills to deal with complex issues.
As an old biddy who tries to view things rationally and settle on the best course of action, I have an observation. I understand that critical thinking is a process but the people I have met, or read, who claim to use critical thinking have put me right off looking it up EDIT I suppose if I am smart it could improve me, I just do not want to be one of those who think it is their third eye.... old biddy here, ignore me
@@josmith9662 They most likely did not posses good critical thinking skills in that case! However Richard Dawkins, Neil Degrasse Tyson and Carl Sagan have good videos on critical thinking.
@@Emberrebme Just a bug bear of mine, any username with critical thinker, truth seeker or similar, usually means unbalanced obssesive..... I might have an explicit read but I am resisting as I am with the new fangdangled pay to win game console generation. Now please respect my wishes and ignore me
People die with the illusion of reason, Or people die with God's love. Well perhaps the remembrance of how clever or great some people were in the short life will live on forever dont you think?
You really are returning to the public eye at the time people need some common sense the most. I sincerely hope young men and women listen to you the same way I did twenty years ago and realize how insane things currently are.
@@NSOcarth Have dowsing, astrology, palm reading, phrenology, astral traveling resulted in laws being changed to force women to accept men in our pri /sons? Also why are you assuming OP endorses any of those things?
This was a fascinating conversation and the parallel between transubstantiation and the gender ideology argument is very compelling. You are perhaps one of the most thoughtful and articulate human beings to have ever lived. It'll be a sad day for humanity when you leave us, please hang on as long as possible!
It is very refreshing to see an intelligent individual like Dawkins see the religious similarities in Trans ideology and many other religions in the world. I would say I do not have a problem with anyone following illogical delusions as long as they do not hurt others, however, when they interact with children or voting systems it is very difficult to see how religious followers could *not* hurt others with their delusions. The Trans ideology is merely the latest in a long line of such, unfortunately this one seems to have trojan horsed into the mainstream as something other than what it is. Until the horse is shown to be hollow the ones shouting from the roof tops of the dangers are unfortunately being vilified.
He’s not tackled anything about trans at all, all he’s done is attack the Fox News version of trans. It’s analogous to someone attacking evolution because a rock can’t turn into a dog
Yes civility and calm work conversation for those who are sycophants for the system and benefit most, from the capitalist system, not the unhinged righteous rage of the truly marginalized, misrepresented, misunderstood and oppressed .
she definitely fell into the "racist/transphobic old white men who think they're intellectuals and can therefore define the reality of marginalized groups" part of youtube@@Mark13091961
@@SteersmanOaring This is part of the reason why. But even rational dogma is dangerous. One may also reason themselves into identity politics. Although perhaps it's ironic, I would say I'm dogmatic about the absolute avoidance of dogma.
this should be the kind of discussion that should sit at the core of every contemporary high school education in Australia, the UK, USA, NZ etc, etc ...
I'm so happy to hear this conversation. I'm a grad student in philosophy of physics and I've been going crazy having to witness the takeover of both science and philosophy.
@@jackabbott1754 What is "the atheist experience?"He is a bigot on some issues he presumes to be be an expert on, as he is intellectually lazy/ grossly ignorant about them, he has not done sufficient research on those "issues" to assume to be an authority on them but only for the sake of popularity, or personal prejudice does he press on with his opinions on such.
He is the founding father of THOUGHT CRIME but it did look like an anti religious crusade yup. Hes laughing all the way to the radical marxist bank & has fans like those in 1930's germany.
Wizards first rule - People believe something for either of two reasons: 1 - They fear it is true. 2 - They desire it to be true. In the case of Christianity it is both.
My theory is that those who were raised in religion - mostly fear it is true. Reverts raised in atheism convert and desire it is true. And there is a third group of those for whom religion is a tradition run in the family. And they fear to say they do not believe and just pretend and take part in the show.
the main reason people believe something is cause it makes them feel good. Not to have control of sth generates a lot of anxiety. Irreversible facts are our worst nightmare. Believing in an all powerful-God and believing you can make a connection with God enables one to have access to an entity that has absolute control over everything. This is perfect to reduce anxiety and fear, cause it puts you in control of everything.
Oh really? So all the common people all believe trans folk are legit? "The wise" in a capitalist system are; 'the wealthy millionaire /billionaire classes' And the rulers; wanting to eradicate transgender folk.
This goes way beyond another religion imo. The concerning aspect from my understanding is that woke ideology pressure groups aren't just presenting another idea, but shutting down free speech about objective reality and scientific evidence in schools and institutions.
The question of transubstantiation in Catholicism and its analogy with transgenderism is wonderful. For comparison, Nietzsche saw modern socialism as a residue of Christianity. To some extent, it is highly possible that what people call ‘woke’ movement today, is deeply rooted in an original Christian double-pattern: a moralistic totalitarianism and a quest for escaping physical reality. Thanks again for this discussion. There should be more channels like this one.
was it wonderful? or woefully idiotic. People are not wine. People are not blood. Humans are not Things. We are beautiful complex psychological creatures.
@Daodan1618 many, if your legacy of psychological trappings were codified by white western CIS straight MEN. Many pple are BORN outside these psychological trappings
I agree that wokeism is the residue of Christianity. I believe Tom Holland (not the actor) has said that the reason we find certain acts to be deplorable today (such as how Harvey Weinstein treats women) is because we've inherited a Christian morality. It's deeply rooted within our culture.
I was going to say that too, that Nietzsche made this point quite long ago so there's not much novelty in this "Substitution hypothesis"; not to say anything about it being a blatant truism from psychological point of view.
The theory that Woke is Gnostic, and so an inversion of Christianity, is popular at the moment. Clearly it's a Manichean world view, a little Neoplatonist too, and these were all related sects.
I'm glad the "trans" stuff is being critically discussed by prominent people... But I'd plead with both these men to STOP PRETENDING TO BELIEVE THE LIE, BY USING SEX-INCORRECT PRONOUNS... Our society got into this mess, in the first place, by prioritizing "being polite", over SIMPLE, EVIDENCE-BASED TRUTH... Humans are NOT perfectly rational beings, and when you continously use use wrong-sex pronouns (EVEN IF it's just "to be polite", and you're mentally translating "she/her"/"trans women" to "men"), it DOES change how you, and others listening, think about these men, who are invading women's spaces. What we need now, is to not be rude and abusive, but to be UNAPOLOGETICALLY HONEST, and to strictly adhere to OBJECTIVE, EVIDENCE-BASED TRUTH... We need to re-establish the the idea that it's NOT "rude or abusive" to acknowledge people's evidence-based sex... But it IS rude, selfish, and entitled, to demand/expect that THE WHOLE WORLD will pretend not to notice your evidence-based sex, and will actively deny your sex, just because YOU want to maintain an objectively false fantasy, 24/7... We ALL need to ONLY use sex-correct pronouns. To ONLY refer to people (according to biologcal sex) as "men" or "women"... At most, acknowledge that Lia Thomas is "a man who SELF-ID'S as 'a trans woman'..." But don't pretend to believe the fantasy that Thomas TRULY IS "a woman" (with OR without the "trans" prefix, which is a dishonest semantic trick, anyway- Adding a prefix can NEVER transform a lie into "truth"...) The antidote to this insanity, is simple, evidence-based truth, and plain, honest English- NOT to affirm all the dishonest lingustic trickery this ideology used to make people swallow lies as "truth"..
@baconsarmy-geddon8298 Huh! These two men have been denounced for calling out how ridiculous "trans" is. These two men denounce the idea that somebody can just declare a different gender.
I do not believe you HAVE to believe a delusion. It is a little condescending to propose a watered down version of Christianity or Islam for Africa. 😂 ok it was tongue in cheek perhaps.
Depends on a number of extremely complex factors, currently this is merely another far right/terf/ GC wedge issue, not actually based in reality but anxiety, fearmongering and conspiracy theories, as I cannot think of any trans women currently doing anything globally, or even locally in female sports, most are blanket banned from competing from age 7 yet a whole generation of trans women who never went through male puberty and were socialized as girls, still; "the science is out". Conservative societies desperation to not update it's understanding and language, to over simplify/stick to outdated understanding of such complex/nuanced subjects such as sex/ biology/gender only serves to support the current patriarchal system, to maintain the status quo and make it easier to control and oppress the masses via binary enforcement of sex and gender.
@@sophiepooks2174 I am not sure you have the correct information on the current trans athletes who holds world records in the female category. And it is also not a good faith signal to mention far right as soon as new rules in sports are being questioned. The name "mens section" is not technically correct and should in most sports be renamed the open section. Gymnastics might be an exception where male physique is worse in the women's section and vice versa. The open category is open for everyone, so nobody is being excluded. And the female category is there to exclude people because the open category is not fair for half the population. There is paralympics and there are strict rules. You can't just join because one foot is a bit bigger than the other. When rules of categories change drastically, it is not unusual for people to question it and the reasons for them
@@sophiepooks2174 Not that complex. Men and women have different biology. Thinking otherwise is creationism, and denial of evolution. Weight lifters, chess players, swimmers, cyclists... there's plenty of them. Some are relegated to their correct category now, but not all of them. And the fact this was a fight at all demonstrates the delusion. You don't get to look around after the war and say "what was the big deal"? Especially with your eyes closed.
I agree and my partner does and she is trans. Not all trans people are obsessed with trans ideology (whatever that means). They are just getting on with their lives.
I think it's more tribalism than religion. Tribalism is banked into our DNA and you have to fight against those instincts. It's normal and even encouraged in society to be against the other team. It definitely mirrors religion - straight down to dogma and belief without evidence but ultimately, it's just my tribe vs. yours.
Agree, however one side does have decades of peer reviewed studies and scientific evidence of such medical conditions being legit and much proof many of the people they condemn as "mentally ill degenerates" have been part of society for a long time, in 1934 the Nazis destroyed all such studies on trans and gender variance at the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft and this is not the first time authoritarians have outlawed and attempted to erase non heterosexuals and gender varients. Obviously authoritarians and the conservative patriarchy see the existence of transsexuals as a real threat to their power and control of the masses, or else they would not have been spending as much money as the Vatican has spent trying to prove the existence of Christ and many of the biblical artifacts mentioned in it as legitimate. We are seeing in states of the USA and many other countries slowly embracing authoritarianism the criminalization of healthcare and very self expression of trans folk, to even mention they exist can get a teacher a heavy jail sentence. What an anxious and strange world we live in.
Religion is just a manifestation of tribalism. Shared ritual creates in-group cohesion. Religions were quite literally just "national religions" until the "universal religions" like Christianity, Islam etc. came about (which also have tribalistic function).
I was brought up Catholic, went to Catholic schools, became an atheist through thoughtful discussion with the nuns and other kids in my class. I was 12. This was the era of Hare Krishna, communes, cults, gurus. What I observed was that those brought up with religion tended not to get sucked in by these. Whereas those with no religious tradition at all were more easily duped. So I think the pathway is Religion - Reasoned Atheism - No Religion - some immunity to cults vs No Religion - vulnerability to cults I don’t think a return to religion is desirable or even possible. We know to much. But we do need better education for children about cults and ideologies. The pathway for an individual from religion to atheism is normally through self education, discussion, testing of theories. We need to replace that. Not easy given the current heated ideological divides but doable if we take it one step at a time.
@@kierasthoughts2480 you and @margaretmm1627 are both right. I wasn't raised with religion, but I got sucked into Catholicism and happily ended up with no religion. The thing is some people are more prone to addictions/ cults than others. I am aware of being in the risk group and thanks to education I know how to avoid being sucked. As an educator, I try to pass my knowledge and experience down to students. I am incredibly grateful to scientists like Richard Dawkins!!!!
Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss are the only rational ones left from the boom of atheism/agnostic movements of the early 2000s. It's an honour to know his work. It helped me abandon the nonsense Islam is and opened my eyes and mind to a reality worth understanding. However little it is I understand is still just better and I'm so glad both of em haven't budged into the abyss of infinite lunacy of the left. Many of their peers have left sanity to appease the madness of the masses. Which bloody surprised me.
After all these years, witnessing Richard Dawkins speak of science and its feats, with a childlike excitement adorning his face, is a sight truly wondrous to embrace.
Richard's mention of Chipping Norton, my old home town, brings a smile to my face. His recent ancestors have a mausoleum attached to the outside north wall of the parish church which has been crumbling behind railings for years and needs doing up in a big way. You're not moving in there are you Richard?!!
I wish I could make these podcasts…. The sound is so bad , this is such nourishing content that needs to be digested late night , therefore warm sound is required 🙏
I’m a conservative (theologically) Christian. I appreciate Professor Dawkins airing these conversations. The nuttiness of these days is bringing together an unlikely collection of folks.
I love how Richard Dawkins is aligned with christian nutheads nowadays instead of following how reality actually flows and how it speaks back to us. absurd.
The problem with science is that the price of admission is too high. You have to be smart and articulate and study for years to join the discussion. In wokeism all that's needed to join the party is lived experience.
Dawkins is kind of silly to believe that reason and evidence is sufficient for humanity. Humans will always crave a connection to the unknown and the unknowable, hence the intractable existence of religion.
I have been pondering this for a couple of years now. That the rise of atheism did not give rise to an age of reason made me realize that the problem is not theism per se, but is the disregard for evidence, reason, logic and skepticism. I'm not sure how we get past emotion and social pressures being the main driving forces in society. Teaching formal logic in schools might at least a tiny first step.
Pascal sympathizes with the passionate agnostic who struggles daily with the ultimate question of whether God exists. But the sad fact is that most “nones” and agnostics are not passionate truth-seekers. In the end, far too many think, “Who cares? What does it really matter? How is this relevant to me? Religion is boring.” . Intellectual uncertainty is understandable. Indifference to the question of God is insanity.
Formal Logic won't help this agenda. I have a degree in mathematics and it has not changed my faith. Didn't change the faith of Riemann or Euler either. Emotion and social pressures will always be the main driving forces in society. Even Genetically Modified Skeptic's channel is slowly gravitating from atheism to satanism. Am I surprised? No. David Hume said you can't get an ought from an is. That's why logic and reason and science don't help. They only deal with what exists now. Not with what things ought to be.
I'm not sure if your basic premise is correct. Has there been a rise in atheism? In the UK religion seems alive and well, especially amongst immigrant communities and their UK born children. 300K - 500K immigrants coming into the country annually bringing their religions with them. Maybe it's different in your country.
@@michaelb2388 Your anecdote notwithstanding, a Google search for religious affiliation over the past 100 years would seem to paint a different picture.
You're a good man Richard! Thanks for all the work you've done! I still reckon that one of the most spiritual experiences of my life was reading your "Ancestor's Tale'.
Yes James. My definition of 'spiritual' is a profound sense of connection - thereby not requiring a deity or religion. Dawkins 'Ancestor's Tale' provided me with that sense of connection through his description of the ancient depth of evolutionary process. @@jameskolar9655
I like Dawkins' analogy. One can conclude many things, among them that the Catholic cannot criticize the transsexual for believing in something that is not because it is scientifically impossible because the Catholic has the same problem. For someone who doesn't believe in those, he can say that they both believe in nonsense.
The substition hypothesis seems pretty valid because of something most people miss about human nature. As a species we are inherently lazy in thought and deed, following the path of least resistance. Demanding evidence and seeking difficult truths requires discipline which goes against our basic nature. If you want people to be more rigorous about truth then we need a culture that embraces discipline and hard work.
So true, Simon! Freud wrote and spoke a century ago about humanity's tendency to abdicate their personal responsibility by letting others (including institutional religions and religious leaders) make their decisions for them. He, too, longed to see our society grow up and take on the arduous task of rationality.
I witness this myself in my own country. In the battle against religious fanaticism, especially during the heated campaign during the previous presidential election, people used another "religion" which is the national ideology. It is proven later that both ideologies are equally harmful and demonizing their opponents. Both are not capable of rational discussion or thought. And actually, this is just another swing of the same pendulum. Several decades ago, my country was highly nationalistic, and it became very religious in let say 20 years. Now the pendulum is swinging to the nationalistic side again.
Two videos out very close together makes a nice change and both along the same lines..its good to see this this man step up he has a real vioce and a huge fan base..we need men like this to step up.. people really are fighting back
I'm so glad Dr. Richard Dawkins has started TH-cam, and so glad I found this channel. Dr. Dawkins, you're a legend. Hope to see many more videos in the coming weeks, months and years to come.
Dr. Dawkins you certainly have NOT wasted your life. Quite the opposite: You have helped establish the argument for the necessity (for a majority subgroup of the population) of belief. People reading your books, watching your countless interviews will have found their place in this "epistemic dichotomy". Thank you for that, Dr. Dawkins. You are much loved!
Thank you Richard for everything. I saw your lecture a few weeks ago at Oxford in the Sheldonian and it was education. will you ever have a podcast where we could submit questions to you?
I don't feel compelled to place religion into my life because I never had it to begin with, but I hear many commenters and people I interact with in the world defend the idea that it's necessary. Which is very strange to me 😂
It seems that picking a side or a tribe is a very well ingrained social adaptation within our species. Religion or other dogma is just way of documenting who/what your side/tribe is/are.
dawkin's face @37:05 - in reference to peter mentioning that the new woke religion that has displaced the Christianity he has fought against all his life - 'and they dont need faith for that' - is the saddest 'yes' I have ever seen.
Yes, RD certainly does inspire us with his intellectual courage, but he also has a lion's share of personal courage, too. How many other public figures continue to speak up for rationality and a secular civil society when they begin to receive threats from the those with whom he does not agree? Dawkins is a tenacious, witty, no nonsense but patient, prolific, dedicated public figure who is changing our world for the better.
3:10 He says "deranged, woke beliefs". That sounds like a description conservative religious people would use. So from his point of view, belief in anything that doesn't conform to his belief system is automatically "woke and deranged". Religious people think Secularism, progressiveism, socialism, and atheism are "woke and deranged".
This is a pretty dishonest summation. Quit playing victim. People have different opinions, including those on the left, which Dawkins obviously is. The left used to be about tolerance, but now radical forces are trying to make their radical beliefs mainstream, and agreement with those beliefs is required, or you get cancelled. F that.
@@NSOcarth Regardless of whether religious objects of worship exist or not, adults seeking worshipful, blind subservience to anyone is dangerously irresponsible on top of being pathetic. It's the same impulse behind those following human cult leaders, and is no better when directed towards any supposed deity.
@@sophiepooks2174 Such as needing blind, dogmatic faith in an ideology to fill a void of meaning in one's life. A desperate need to abdicate moral responsibility for one's self to some external authority. Etc.
Tell us all Kimani what you believe in? What is your coping strategy for your existential deficiencies? Einstein wrote about his beliefs concerning Science and Religion and I wouldn't characterize him as irrational or having an irrational belief system.
I get that a lot too. Because I’m opposed to woke I must support MAGA or vice versa, depending on which cult I’m addressing at the time. Actually, I’m opposed to both because I don’t care for irrational extremism. I prefer evidence based rationality instead of fear and hate. But society is so polarized and it seems like many people struggle to think broader than two.
Richard, I can't say whether or not the substitution hypothesis is correct or not. My belief is that for some people it is true and others it is not. What I do know for a fact is that not only has your work in evolutionary biology had a profound impact on our society, but your work in atheism and driving people to think critically profoundly helped me leave Islam. And although that period of my life was arduous and painful, your work is what made it easy. There are plenty of people who leave toxic dogmas and belief systems that then go on to live a life of critical thinking. Even if it is true that other substitute it for other misguided beliefs. Whenever I meet other like-minded people who have left various religions, they always know the name Richard Dawkins. You are an intellectual hero.
In bacteriology, we recognize that the vast legions of bacteria on (say) a kitchen countertop are benign to humans. Excessive use of antibacterials everywhere tend to result in a elimination of all populations of bacteria leaving those surfaces to be recolonized (inevitably) by bacterial colonies that turn out to be much more harmful to humans. Alternately, we could use a viral inoculant metaphor; that the presence of benign ideas to 'fill that memetic space in peoples' heads' armors them against more toxic, virulent ideas. Fascinating talk, thank you.
I'm from Sweden and are here in TH-cam a little more than my friends. The problem about sexes in the US and Great Britain seems not be a problem at all here. When I talk about it to my friends, they look completely zeroed, wondering what I'm talking about. So I'm wondering... is it really something an average person in the US/Great Britain is talking about outside social media? I understand that it's a real problem for example about that guy who won in the swimming contest for women, or that rapist who claimed he was a woman ...but here we never heard about it or similar cases. This is not something our news seems to bother about. Could it be that this is a non-issue that is completely exaggerated and only fueled by social media, in social media? or is it only I who are fed all this films about the subject by the algoritm because I think its really strange and therefor interesting?
Here in California the problem of the sexes is something that the media, the schools, and the government is forcing down our throats. It is not something we think about or talk about in real life except when it affects us directly. Parents who have children in school (thank God my children are adults) are fighting because their children are being taught that they can change their sex. Women in sports are fighting when a man pretending to be a woman enters the sport. Some 15 years ago California declared all public bathrooms unisex and for a while stores that had public bathrooms went along with it. The idea died away because people like me, who needed to use a bathroom in the middle of shopping, cancelled shopping and just went home to use their own "safe, no man lurking inside" bathroom. The Netherlands just decided that a very ugly pretend woman to be Miss Netherlands.
I live in Austria and it's definitely an issue here too. Everywhere, but especially in educational institutions. There are several "trans kids" in nearly every classroom now. In reality they usually are autistic or have mental health conditions. Or, they're just alternative teens who would have been goth, emo, punk etc. in the 90s. Often, they dye their hair blue. I doubt it's not a problem in Sweden. But most people outside of these institutions don't realize/notice it. Being "attractive" has nothing to do with the discussion though.
@@valerianmandrake Sorry that I got a little emotional, it just annoys me how the gender activists have such a holier than thou attitude. I wonder if they understand how their outrageous claims engender disdain and hatred. I saw a discussion where someone was justifying death threats because of misgendering. The vitriol they spew while talking about "inclusivity" is so hypocritical.
I'm in the UK. I was served by a bearded man wearing a dress in a very large department store. (Totally inappropriate behaviour around children IMO and he looked ridiculous). The lady in front of me said loudly, "us women have to stick together". I could have kissed her! So no, it is very real but in my experience anyway, very rare. Incidentally, a supermarket chain during "pride" month festooned their shops with flags and bunting. Literally, pushing this in our faces. Unfortunately, it's not restricted to the online world of social media.
@@simonshee5155 I really don't have a problem with a man wearing a dress. A man can dress however he wants. He can even have a female name. But he cant claim he is a biological woman saying he know how it is to be a woman, because he can't.
Woke means awake/aware of social injustice, there is a book called 'a dictionary' amazing how you can live on this planet for 62 years and not realize how dumb what you just said sounds.
Teach science approach in school not just scientific subjects. Even though I was taught math, physics,biology and chemistry from being 13 years old I did not grasp the idea of the scientific method until university.
I have personally come to the substitution hypothesis (though I haven't referred to it as such), and I have flocked to Christianity in response, but I have still gained a lot from Richard Dawkins and I thank God for people like him. I appreciate the principles to which he has dedicated himself and I value the curiosity and awe he exhibits and inspires
This channel is so incredibly refreshingly intelligent. It's almost calming and centering to listen to genuine facts void of emotions. Intellectually stimulating and grounding simultaneously. I'm grateful to you sir.
Largely fair enough but the conversation could have touched on so-called intersex individuals, i.e. females who develop with male physical characteristics/males with female ones. How are these people supposed to interact with culture/the world and if surgery is deemed a solution, where lies the boundary for intervention?
Irrelevant. Intersex people (people with DSD) have literally nothing to do with trans ideology, and have been coopted by trans rights activists in an attempt to legitimise their metaphysical claims. Also, people with DSD still have a sex. They just have medical conditions related to this sex, ie only men can have Klinefelter syndrome. DSD people with noticeable symptoms are a tiny minority, they are accommodated in society, and do not cause any issues. 99.999% of transidentified people do not have a DSD, although they sure would like to because in their mind it would make them more valid. Which is pathetic. Again, DSD is not a fun third sex, it means that people have a serious medical condition.
Professor Dawkins, you mention that ‘whites inherit the sin of slavery’. Recently I watched a TH-cam video on ‘Facts about slavery not taught in school’ by Thomas Sowell. From this it seems that while it’s true that whites participated in slavery (as did most other races), not only was it both as master AND slave, it was also more due to intervention by whites that so much of slavery has been abolished. I admit I have not researched the claims presented but they all seem to me to be logical and valid. How much race hate do you think would be reduced if it were more widely known that blacks enslaved blacks and whites enslaved whites along with most other peoples of the world?
Although I don't dismiss out of hand the 'replacement theory' I find it a bit too convenient. Many European countries (including the UK) have always been more secular than the U.S. I think you have to look farther to find an explanation for a U.S. generation's lack of belief f(which has always been lower than Europe's). It seems people are taking as the standard, the decrease in the U.S. population's belief in religion, to be the indicator of the rest of the world's beliefs. The religiosity of Sweden has always been lower than the U.S. Why haven't the Swedish then, always been more woke? We have more work to do, it seems to me, to find some institutional appeal to the origin of 'wokeness'.
Not always. Certainly the U.S. has had higher levels of religiosity for the past 100-120 years. I’m not sure that always holds in the 19th century or before. The Victorian era was quite evangelical; Prior to the 1850’s, Catholics, Jews, and Atheists could not be seated in the House of Commons. The prohibition on any established religion in the U.S. Constitution stands in stark contrast. For what it’s worth, I truly admire the British Constitution (and it’s evolution), as well as the remarkable political efficacy of it’s people.
I remember reading an article several years ago that showed that the decline of religion among Millennials could be directly tied to the perceived homophobia coming from religious people in the country during the debate on whether gays could serve in the military and whether guys could marry and other issues pertaining to gay rights. In other words, Millennials did NOT reject religion for reasons of embracing rationality, they rejected it because of the VALUES they saw religion promoting. If this is true then it shouldn't be surprising that many of them embraced an alternative system of irrational beliefs like some of the beliefs associated with "wokism". Rationality doesn't appear to have ever been their goal. Otherwise people with this worldview would not be so unwilling to hold their beliefs up to scrutiny.
I read a few of your books back in high school and I enjoyed them all. They gave me a new light into life and I’m forever grateful. Now this TH-cam channel is the good news all of us rational beings have been waiting for. THANK YOU❤
Mr. Dawkins, I read your mother's poems. They are delightful, and on her dog. I had a cat for 17.5 years, Smokey, Siamese. And I agree with your mother, Smokey was a person. I really enjoy the subjects you discuss on religion, gender, the poetry of reality, trans and so on.
Oh my goodness, I used to be a professional musician, and spent many happy hours making music in a recording studio in Chipping Norton. Would that Prof Dawkins had visited us during one of our sessions he would have been a most welcome guest, especially by me.
Thank you Richard Dawkins, for these two recent podcasts. Both were highly enjoyable and I'm hoping there will be many more to come. I am not a professional biologist, geneticist, or scientist of any sort, simply someone who has had a keen interest in science from an early age and loves to read scientific literature. Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World" and your "Blind Watchmaker" are two of the most important and influential books I have ever read. That being said, I have for about a decade now had a theory (anecdotal of course) about religion and conservative thought in general vs. atheism/agnosticism and skeptical thinking in general. HEADS UP! IT'S GENETIC! I've come to the conclusion that they appear to be hard wired. Not one simple gene of course, but that humans have a range of them, inherited randomly from both parents, and depending on which combination you get, you fall on a spectrum. More "Left" genes and you tend to be liberal and more open to science. More "Right" genes and you tend to be more conservative and less skeptical about certain types of things. A general mix and you wind up essentially a political centrist that may or may not lean a little more to one side or the other. I realize this sounds overly simplistic, but there seems to me to be a lot of (again, anecdotal) evidence for it. Among the biggest examples are western democracies. No matter which country you look at, no matter where in the world, no matter their level of education and relative wealth, they're always split somewhere near the middle. Assuming they are a true democracy where the people are free to vote their conscience, there's nearly always a real question which party will come out better in the next election. Even if one side is favored for a period of time, it will inevitably swing the other way eventually. I'm not aware of any countries where 80% of the population is liberal and conservatives never have a chance, or vice versa. In general, (again we're talking about real, truly free democracies here) populations tend to be 30-40% one way, 30-40% the other and 20-30% floating in the middle. My own personal example would be my family. My father enjoyed the findings of science (we both breathlessly watched Cosmos together in 1980), and wasn't especially big on religion. My mother was a hard core evangelical, Bible thumping, Southern Baptist Christian who could not care less about science of any sort and literally thought "evolution" was a dirty word. My brother and I grew up in the same house, with the same parents with essentially identical circumstances. I turned out ultimately to be a science nerd, politically left of center and an atheist. My brother turned out to be a religious right-wing conservative MAGA nut job. Ugh. My brother most certainly isn't unintelligent, just wired differently. I'm sure many in your audience have had similar experiences, or at the very least know others that have. So, environment doesn't seem to be the issue. And intelligence and education doesn't seem to have anything to do with it either. For example, Francis Collins. A brilliant, highly educated, world renowned geneticist, who led the Human Genome Project and yet deeply believes Jesus Christ is the son of god and is his personal savior. All those brains, and yet still gullible to the mysterious and ineffable. Another famous example would be Joe Rogan. I know many think he is a right-wing nut, but he really isn't. If one listens to him for any length of time, you'll see he's very liberal on most things. He's an atheist, who is very intelligent, scientifically curious and loves getting deep into actual science issues like how man-made climate change is real. Yet if he has someone on his show talking about aliens/UFOs, or how taking psychedelics might connect you to the cosmos, he's all in on that too. My point with those two examples is education and intelligence or the lack thereof doesn't seem to be the answer as to whether someone raised religiously winds up continuing to believe in god as opposed to outgrowing it. Some people are just hard wired to think there is more to the universe than what we can see or test for in a lab. That may be why some people who are ultimately able to break free from religion seem more susceptible to grabbing on to some other form of nonsense to fill the void. They're not dumb, or uneducated. It doesn't matter how much they learn, they're genetically programmed to "Believe" in something. This set of genes (if it exists) would explain why two effectively identical members of the human species can receive the same information, yet process it differently and literally have no idea how the other came to the opposite conclusion. And why it seems that no amount of effort or education will ever completely erase one side or the other from the equation. As a science nerd, naturally I grew up watching Star Trek. I used to think in my younger years that even if such fanciful things as transporters or warp drives never actually came about, that eventually in a couple hundred years or so, the general theme of a future with no religion and no war might actually be possible. Ah youth. After slowly coming to the conclusion that political and religious tendencies are hard wired to one degree or other, I no longer think that's possible. Our great, great, great, etc., grandchildren will still be going to the polls trying to make sure that the dirty bastard from the other party doesn't make it into office! Especially because they believe (or don't) in Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, or whoever the hell. And xenophobia (racism) which is part of out evolutionary heritage will still be around too. I would love to hear your thoughts. Thanks again for the great podcasts. What a shame Hitch isn't around to be on your show. Cheers, Keenan
It's funny that you mention Star Trek. There was an episode that was about going to an Earth that was under the oppression of the Romans and that's because in that timeline Jesus' influence only spread to a handful of believers. Star Trek never celebrated atheism. That's because science and religion aren't mutually exclusive. Those fields can overlap. I agree with you that religion is more hard wired into people then others. However, we all believe in things that we can't prove. I assume that you believe all humans have inherit moral worth, yet you didn't come to that conclusion from looking into a microscope. If you look at the field of theology, a lot of rigorous thought goes into it. It's not the case that atheists are closer to the truth because theists hate science. Both sides love science when it's convenient and hate it when it's inconvenient.
Speaking of the scientific method, if affirmation significantly reduces suicide, the highest rates of trans-related suicides should occur outside of the western world. What is the trans suicide rate per capita in Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Mexico? What was the number of trans-related suicides per capita in the US for each decade from 1950 to 2023? Are we seeing the lowest rates ever at the moment? Would such investigative studies be welcome in gender studies class, or would it get one canceled 😂?
So, the best way to reduce trans-related suicides is to forbid any social acknowledgement and legal support to people who face this issue, and threat it as an illness (or a sin) as it has been traditionally approached. On the other hand, I find it very dissapointing that people consider such a tragic problem as something funny.
It doesn't reduce suicide, because trans is not the underlying cause. They're not suicidal because they're trans, they adopt a trans identity in response to their existing anxieties and depressions. There is no statistical difference between suicide of trans-claiming kids and kids with anxiety, depression, trauma, etc. It's exactly the same proportion, which demonstrates the reality. It would not be welcome. Anything which quantifies or tries to explain with biology will not be looked upon kindly, as it means "science" will come up with a way of performing "conversion therapy" on trans. They want you to just accept their claim unquestioningly. The fact this contradicts their bogus "trans brain" claim, and the fact they want drugs and surgeries is irrelevant. That's the religiosity.
Not at all compelling. I think your first question is actually quite easy to answer: if there was a person who committed suicide in any of those countries you mentioned because they were trans, we probably would not know it. Hell, they might not even know it. The suicide would simply be attributed to some other cause. This should sound familiar, because this is akin to people talking about how autism rates are the highest they've ever been, or how there are more gay people than there have ever been. It's probable that neither of these things are true. 50 years ago, we didn't have the tools to diagnose autism to the extent we do today... so people who were actually autistic were never diagnosed. 50 years ago, being gay in the US was substantially more dangerous than it is today, so many gay people chose to hide.
I don't worry about the substitution hypothesis. The way I see it, people don't have a deep psychological need for religion. They do have a deep need for community, purpose, meaning, mental comfort etc. Religion is only 1 possible means to obtain those ends.
True, but it is normally the one folks like to go to first, and suggest to others, something I find annoying. There are YT channels telling people to go to church to make friends. True, one may meet others, but not people one has much if anything in common with. There is a difference between being alone and being lonely. And, if one helps others one also helps oneself.
As long as there is suffering in the world there will be religion. Academics also suffer from their own ivory tower delusions thinking that by simply instilling critical thinking skills all will be right with the world, not realizing that malnutrition, violence & a whole host of other pathologies need to be addressed before this is even possible. I find that many academics have a callousness toward the underprivileged. What would you do if you were daily on the brink of death, wish for a better world or develop your critical thinking skills?
Such a huge fan of Richard Dawkins, and I was thoroughly impressed with the conversation that was had with Helen Joyce. Very much looking forward to any and all upcoming conversations!
42:17 Richard: Darwin solved the problem of creation in biology... Peter: Is there anything we dont understand in Biology.. Richard: Yes, how it started
Thats true people follow tribes even if they dont truly believe in what it stands for, ive seen that all my life. I feel its to do with being outcasted or something bad will happen to them
I think Monty Python effectively dealt with male pregnancy years ago: "Well you can't have a baby. Where's fetus gonna gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?"
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzsche
Although I have many differences with much of what he says, try reading "The madness of Crowds" by Douglas Murray
Explains AA NA CA SA MA. All those 12 step religious programs that is the new religion across the world. But its members become more and more deluded as time passes.
@@Cmkrs34 please help me, what are AA NA CA SA MA?
This was never more obvious to people that are critical thinkers than during the COVID pandemonium 🙂 Very conspicuous example of hysteria taking hold of masses of people globally, with hysterical consequences like the run on toilet paper in Australia, then London. Of course it quickly decended into worse outcomes like lockdowns and ridiculous mask wearing, then arresting kids for having snowball fights and fining them 10,000 pounds for it.....
Dr Richard Dawkins, I have become an atheist and learned to look at evidence when forming my beliefs and opinions because of you . And suddenly the world started making so much more sense . I am sure there are many more like me who you helped. Your life's work is certainly not a waste . Thank you so much for speaking
Yes, me too but I did that at age 15 when the preacher's sermon rattled my brain enough for me to reject the notion of religion ! Slava Dawkins, Slava Ukraini !
@@linmal2242 Heroyam Slava
It sounds like you rejected all the evidence.
It sounds like you have an opinion.
@@andyh5300 and your point is ?
I used to be a Jehovah's witness. I left in 2014 and since then I have read almost all of Dawkins books. They are my golden collection.
I outgrew God and got rid of the God Delusion.
Im glad you got out of that cult, but sorry to say that you never had God
And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
1 John 5:11-12 KJV
I can understand your pain of growing up in restrictive religious environment.. it really kills the desire to really know God, but he is still there for you just ask in the name of Jesus Christ and you will receive.
Well done to you 👍
@@Oozy9Millimeetah bollocks
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ are you happy ? are you satisfied ?
@@Oozy9Millimeetah Are you taking the piss?
Professor Dawkins, what a privilege to have met you. Not only have you taught me so much, but I also experience profound serenity and contentment when I watch you and listen to you.
I'll be forever grateful.
Darwinian Evolutionary Religion does not belong in the science classroom as it is a contested ideology, it is far from being a fact of science. We should stand up against things we consider to be harmful and troublesome to the health of a nation. Darwinian religion taught as a fact to students is a back door to promoting alsorts of immoral behaviour! It encourages perverse sexual orientations which have always been around throughout the centuries. It sears the consciences of many concerning right and wrong. It promote theft, gambling, adultery, lying, violence and murder etc. If there is no God to answer too for our words and actions, why bother to behave! Sin takes peace away from the earth and replaces it with anarchy, chaos and confusion. When sin gets out of control then curfews will be imposed upon the populace. The nations of the world have rejected the loving words of Jesus to their own detriment. Jesus said love God with all of your heart, [and God is a spirit which you cannot see, but you can get to a place where you feel his power and presence in the temple of your body] and love your neighbour as your self. What is there not to understand? And what is there not to love about Jesus? All the denominations we have today are not the Lord's will, they bring confusion to those who are seeking to know Jesus and understand his teachings. Every idle word spoken by preachers that does not line up with the teachings of Jesus shall be condemned on the day of judgment. Just as many of the Pharisees and Sadducees shall be condemned as they would not adhere to the loving commandments of Jesus. Many refused to repent after the death are resurrection of Jesus. An angel descended from heaven whose countenance was like lightening and for fear of him the Roman soldiers fled the scene and some of them reported back and told the Sanhedrin what had really happened. They gave them large summons of money to the soldiers in order for them to tell a lie, saying his disciples came by night and stole his body away. They said to the soldiers, if what really happened comes to Pilates ears, we will persuade him and secure you. Suppression of the truth still goes on today regarding the insurmountable evidence against evolution. At all costs, they must suppress, ignore and disregard all evidences against evolution, they must protect the sacred cow of their religion. Jesus predicted all this during his ministry right up to the end of this present age.
So glad that you have found contentment and serenity - those are gifts from God which is ironic that you attribute them to RD. Keep searching - eventually RD too will disappoint you. Our hearts are restless until they find God (St Augustine) - the only one who does not disappoint. Peace to you. :-)
He is also a very fast runner. Look at how fast he ran from William Lane Craig.
Gullibility expands to fill the vacuum - perfect quote from Richard.
I am an atheist. Women should not give up their rights to men who are deluded into thinking they are not in the right body. It is women's language that is under attack and it is women's rights also undermined, not men's in trans ideology. Women should not give way because a man is deluded. Biological facts should matter more than hurt feelings. Trans ideology is the new religion. Language, meaning and definitions matter. It is for this reason I do not go down the pronoun falacy depended on feelings.
Agreed. I don't use the pronoun stuff. Let's just call everyone human being.
The bitter irony is that it is women who are leading the attack on women's language and women's rights. The majority of people supporting and pushing gender woo are young women, sadly. The boom in gender clinics is driven by young women showing up because they want to become men.
@@MyPronounIsGoddess I highly doubt he believes you can "earn" the ability to change sex.
I'm not sure what he said, that you're referring to, but you seem to imply, that maybe he thinks that "10 year effort" is evidence the man is SINCERE in "wanting to be a woman" (whatever that means)? And that he thinks that SINCERITY deserves a degree of respect?
Personally, I'm pretty hardline on the "gender" stuff- I will ONLY use sex-correct pronouns, and to me "woman" and "man" are strictly defined by sex- Zero exceptions.
...but there WAS a time, when I still swallowed the "whats the harm?" narrative, and used wrong-sex pronouns for people who self-ID as trans, "to be polite"... Me being 'peaked' was a gradual process, that took time- And I think that's the case for most people, who start from a position of seeing transgenderism as part of the "LGBT", who they're used to supporting.
Give him time, maybe 6 months or a year (or maybe significantly less), and I'll bet money he'll end up with the same universal rejection of the ENTIRE ideology.
But he's only just recently STARTED talking about this topic, in any depth- I don't think it's surprising he's probably going through the same GRADUAL process of being 'peaked', as most critics of "gender" ideology do... But the fact that he's BEING critical of it, AT ALL makes me think that TOTAL rejection of the WHILE ideology will come sooner, rather than later.
The last thing we need, as critics of "gender" nonsense, is to have the same zero-tolerance for ANY diversity of opinion, or for changing beliefs, that the PRO-"gender" ideologues enforce so zealously...
Proof that some atheists are not immune to stylized complex propaganda. Do you realize how much money has been spent on anti-trans think tanks over the past decade by groups on the far right and how so many on the left also have the wrong takes on trans matters? Meanwhile many trans youth and adults in the USA and other countriesare begging politicians not to take away their healthcare and right to exist in public, sounds "all powerful" right?
Do you realize biology is an extremely complex subject way to complicated for the average layperson who attended high school 101 to comprehend, oversimplification of biology only serves to maintain patriarchal authoritarian control of the masses by enforcing by law the idea of the gender binary for all based on sex observed at birth.
Do you even understand why supporting the authoritarian fascist regime in Russia declaring lgbt folk "enemies of the state" and "a danger to women and children" is being on the wrong side of history? Just because of what you believed to be a democratic nation in the past?
If being trans is "a religion" rather than a medical condition that has been used by bad faith wealthy opportunists as a wedge issue to in turn attack the queer community and pass draconian laws to eradicate a micro minorities freedom of expression and right to exist in public, as a Trojan horse to normalize/soft sell fascist ideology to eventually attack all lgbq rights. then women's rights to bodily autonomy after that.
FYI; Pronouns have always been in the dictionary and used daily whether you realize it or it hurts your feelings to show common decency to others.
@@baconsarny-geddon8298they will try to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and that will be us gays who have been around forever. I think there is some chance the ideology was reinforced as a means of controlled opposition to try to associate gays, lesbians and bisexuals and disenfranchise them and associate them with absurdity.
Richard Dawkins made me an atheist thank God.
😂 reading bible made me atheist. Dawkins just made me realise i was 100% correct
So you should study more (from another non religious person, agnostic. More precisely).
@@gregczarlinski2811hmmmm...
😂😂😂
Nice to know you are a deep and considered thinker 😅
Inspiring. @ 82 years old and Mr Dawkins is starting a TH-cam channel and a substack.
I love 💜 him.
Wow. He’s looks great for 82. Hopefully we have him around for a while.
@darkreverie7027 indeed I hope i look like him @ his age and still doing TH-cam
@@darkreverie7027 I hope so, too. God bless.
Great to have such brains and at 80 still has his good looks and mellow speaking voice.
Dawkins is wonderful, thankfully I got pulled out of religious thinking by his work, and important thing is to become rational and apply it across the board...
Well, rationality is important to SOME, but it's not like it's required by nature or anything. Nature doesn't care whether we pursue truth or not. It doesn't even care if we continue to evolve and survive.
I am delighted to discover that I'm not the only scientifically-oriented person who thinks the woke view on gender and sexuality is nuts.
Being 'woke' originally was about being aware of racism is all its forms, not just the more obvious KKK style. It has since expanded to being aware of discrimination in many forms.
Sexuality is one that I do not see as problematic to be 'woke' about - people are literally attracted to people of the same sex, there isn't really any doubt about that from reasonable people.
Trans ideology, on the other hand, is essentially a neo-religion wanting to be forced upon people, whether they believe it or not - with really dangerous laws being passed to accomodate this, including indoctrinating children. The 'woke' argument being made here has taken a wrong turn - it shouldn't even be thought of as woke to promote the desires of a religion in the first place.
The problem isn't 'woke', the problem is the trojan horse that has passed through the gates.
You are not alone!
@@aimerw brilliant take!
youre certainly not alone..most people have of common sense and don't buy into that nonsense
i think it is just, a fad. get used to it. imagine the variety as biological and genetic engineering progress at a speed we are just not ready for. we are going to become human machine bio hybrids in our lifetime. sooner than we thought for sure. they can make lab mice have purple hair or glow on the dark. Brace yourself for body modification gone wild!
The scientific method should be taught in high schools across the world, then this problem is solved in a generation. Most people do not have the critical thinking skills to deal with complex issues.
As an old biddy who tries to view things rationally and settle on the best course of action, I have an observation. I understand that critical thinking is a process but the people I have met, or read, who claim to use critical thinking have put me right off looking it up
EDIT I suppose if I am smart it could improve me, I just do not want to be one of those who think it is their third eye.... old biddy here, ignore me
@@josmith9662 They most likely did not posses good critical thinking skills in that case! However Richard Dawkins, Neil Degrasse Tyson and Carl Sagan have good videos on critical thinking.
@@EmberrebmeNeil has lost his mind.
@@Emberrebme Just a bug bear of mine, any username with critical thinker, truth seeker or similar, usually means unbalanced obssesive..... I might have an explicit read but I am resisting as I am with the new fangdangled pay to win game console generation. Now please respect my wishes and ignore me
Hi, I disagree. Science can be used to build atomic bombs or toasters. Reason is a means to achieve your ends, not choose them.
What a brilliant conversation. It gives me hope that reason is out there. Thank you Richard
Very funny
@@zapkvr Very funny comment !
We had 'the age of reason' woke is the epitome of unreason. Lets hope it is not the undoing of us all.
People die with the illusion of reason, Or people die with God's love. Well perhaps the remembrance of how clever or great some people were in the short life will live on forever dont you think?
@@NSOcarth I apologize that i did not understand the meaning.
You really are returning to the public eye at the time people need some common sense the most. I sincerely hope young men and women listen to you the same way I did twenty years ago and realize how insane things currently are.
Wow an anime avatar that isn’t a T* identified person!
I really wish Hitchens was here, too. He’d would have called out this nonsense
@@Ithaca-vv5dy Vale C H !
@@NSOcarth Have dowsing, astrology, palm reading, phrenology, astral traveling resulted in laws being changed to force women to accept men in our pri /sons?
Also why are you assuming OP endorses any of those things?
@@NSOcarth Why did you assume OP was "silent on" the things you listed?
This was a fascinating conversation and the parallel between transubstantiation and the gender ideology argument is very compelling.
You are perhaps one of the most thoughtful and articulate human beings to have ever lived.
It'll be a sad day for humanity when you leave us, please hang on as long as possible!
It’s a shame a philosopher needed reexplaining that and doesn’t understand basic other things.
It is very refreshing to see an intelligent individual like Dawkins see the religious similarities in Trans ideology and many other religions in the world.
I would say I do not have a problem with anyone following illogical delusions as long as they do not hurt others, however, when they interact with children or voting systems it is very difficult to see how religious followers could *not* hurt others with their delusions.
The Trans ideology is merely the latest in a long line of such, unfortunately this one seems to have trojan horsed into the mainstream as something other than what it is. Until the horse is shown to be hollow the ones shouting from the roof tops of the dangers are unfortunately being vilified.
@@aimerw Well said!
DAWKINS HA SIDO TOTALMENTE REFUTADO
th-cam.com/video/fjDZd_CgSSk/w-d-xo.html
Its his ability to communicate an idea so clearly, so logically and whilst remaining so calm that impresses me
He’s not tackled anything about trans at all, all he’s done is attack the Fox News version of trans. It’s analogous to someone attacking evolution because a rock can’t turn into a dog
Yes civility and calm work conversation for those who are sycophants for the system and benefit most, from the capitalist system, not the unhinged righteous rage of the truly marginalized, misrepresented, misunderstood and oppressed .
@@sophiepooks2174 have you joined the wrong thread by accident?
@@Mark13091961😂😂😂
she definitely fell into the "racist/transphobic old white men who think they're intellectuals and can therefore define the reality of marginalized groups" part of youtube@@Mark13091961
Dogma and identity politics always bring forth monsters.
"The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters":
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sleep_of_Reason_Produces_Monsters
The Flying Spaghetti Monster being an outlier.
@@SteersmanOaring This is part of the reason why. But even rational dogma is dangerous.
One may also reason themselves into identity politics.
Although perhaps it's ironic, I would say I'm dogmatic about the absolute avoidance of dogma.
@@foreignwindow I wouldn't classify the FSM as a dogma inducing entity.
And often come with more cruelty than those who are not religious!
this should be the kind of discussion that should sit at the core of every contemporary high school education in Australia, the UK, USA, NZ etc, etc ...
I'm so happy to hear this conversation. I'm a grad student in philosophy of physics and I've been going crazy having to witness the takeover of both science and philosophy.
Happy to hear he is writing another book, looking forward to it!
Thank you Richard for being such an amazing scientist and overall a rational and compassionate human being.
Such a shame the atheist experience is labelling him as a bigot
@@jackabbott1754 What is "the atheist experience?"He is a bigot on some issues he presumes to be be an expert on, as he is intellectually lazy/ grossly ignorant about them, he has not done sufficient research on those "issues" to assume to be an authority on them but only for the sake of popularity, or personal prejudice does he press on with his opinions on such.
@@jackabbott1754English is tough.
He is the founding father of THOUGHT CRIME but it did look like an anti religious crusade yup.
Hes laughing all the way to the radical marxist bank & has fans like those in 1930's germany.
Wizards first rule - People believe something for either of two reasons:
1 - They fear it is true.
2 - They desire it to be true.
In the case of Christianity it is both.
My theory is that those who were raised in religion - mostly fear it is true. Reverts raised in atheism convert and desire it is true. And there is a third group of those for whom religion is a tradition run in the family. And they fear to say they do not believe and just pretend and take part in the show.
the main reason people believe something is cause it makes them feel good. Not to have control of sth generates a lot of anxiety. Irreversible facts are our worst nightmare. Believing in an all powerful-God and believing you can make a connection with God enables one to have access to an entity that has absolute control over everything. This is perfect to reduce anxiety and fear, cause it puts you in control of everything.
You're right, Christianity is true.
You ain’t seen nothing yet. Atheistic trans humanism is in the pipeline. And we thought Communism was bad enough.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
Seneca
Oh really? So all the common people all believe trans folk are legit? "The wise" in a capitalist system are; 'the wealthy millionaire /billionaire classes' And the rulers; wanting to eradicate transgender folk.
Toyota said that?
This goes way beyond another religion imo.
The concerning aspect from my understanding is that woke ideology pressure groups aren't just presenting another idea, but shutting down free speech about objective reality and scientific evidence in schools and institutions.
The question of transubstantiation in Catholicism and its analogy with transgenderism is wonderful. For comparison, Nietzsche saw modern socialism as a residue of Christianity. To some extent, it is highly possible that what people call ‘woke’ movement today, is deeply rooted in an original Christian double-pattern: a moralistic totalitarianism and a quest for escaping physical reality. Thanks again for this discussion. There should be more channels like this one.
was it wonderful? or woefully idiotic. People are not wine. People are not blood. Humans are not Things. We are beautiful complex psychological creatures.
@Daodan1618 many, if your legacy of psychological trappings were codified by white western CIS straight MEN. Many pple are BORN outside these psychological trappings
I agree that wokeism is the residue of Christianity. I believe Tom Holland (not the actor) has said that the reason we find certain acts to be deplorable today (such as how Harvey Weinstein treats women) is because we've inherited a Christian morality. It's deeply rooted within our culture.
I was going to say that too, that Nietzsche made this point quite long ago so there's not much novelty in this "Substitution hypothesis"; not to say anything about it being a blatant truism from psychological point of view.
The theory that Woke is Gnostic, and so an inversion of Christianity, is popular at the moment. Clearly it's a Manichean world view, a little Neoplatonist too, and these were all related sects.
I'm glad the "trans" stuff is being critically discussed by prominent people... But I'd plead with both these men to STOP PRETENDING TO BELIEVE THE LIE, BY USING SEX-INCORRECT PRONOUNS...
Our society got into this mess, in the first place, by prioritizing "being polite", over SIMPLE, EVIDENCE-BASED TRUTH...
Humans are NOT perfectly rational beings, and when you continously use use wrong-sex pronouns (EVEN IF it's just "to be polite", and you're mentally translating "she/her"/"trans women" to "men"), it DOES change how you, and others listening, think about these men, who are invading women's spaces.
What we need now, is to not be rude and abusive, but to be UNAPOLOGETICALLY HONEST, and to strictly adhere to OBJECTIVE, EVIDENCE-BASED TRUTH...
We need to re-establish the the idea that it's NOT "rude or abusive" to acknowledge people's evidence-based sex... But it IS rude, selfish, and entitled, to demand/expect that THE WHOLE WORLD will pretend not to notice your evidence-based sex, and will actively deny your sex, just because YOU want to maintain an objectively false fantasy, 24/7...
We ALL need to ONLY use sex-correct pronouns. To ONLY refer to people (according to biologcal sex) as "men" or "women"... At most, acknowledge that Lia Thomas is "a man who SELF-ID'S as 'a trans woman'..." But don't pretend to believe the fantasy that Thomas TRULY IS "a woman" (with OR without the "trans" prefix, which is a dishonest semantic trick, anyway- Adding a prefix can NEVER transform a lie into "truth"...)
The antidote to this insanity, is simple, evidence-based truth, and plain, honest English- NOT to affirm all the dishonest lingustic trickery this ideology used to make people swallow lies as "truth"..
@baconsarmy-geddon8298 Huh! These two men have been denounced for calling out how ridiculous "trans" is. These two men denounce the idea that somebody can just declare a different gender.
I agree.
I do not believe you HAVE to believe a delusion. It is a little condescending to propose a watered down version of Christianity or Islam for Africa. 😂 ok it was tongue in cheek perhaps.
Gender Studies should be dropped as a course of study at any university.
I marvel at scientific discovery.
I remember thinking of course everyone will agree trans women can't compete against women 😂
Me too. I thought feminists would surely protect women. How wrong we were
Depends on a number of extremely complex factors, currently this is merely another far right/terf/ GC wedge issue, not actually based in reality but anxiety, fearmongering and conspiracy theories, as I cannot think of any trans women currently doing anything globally, or even locally in female sports, most are blanket banned from competing from age 7 yet a whole generation of trans women who never went through male puberty and were socialized as girls, still; "the science is out".
Conservative societies desperation to not update it's understanding and language, to over simplify/stick to outdated understanding of such complex/nuanced subjects such as sex/ biology/gender only serves to support the current patriarchal system, to maintain the status quo and make it easier to control and oppress the masses via binary enforcement of sex and gender.
@@sophiepooks2174 I am not sure you have the correct information on the current trans athletes who holds world records in the female category. And it is also not a good faith signal to mention far right as soon as new rules in sports are being questioned. The name "mens section" is not technically correct and should in most sports be renamed the open section. Gymnastics might be an exception where male physique is worse in the women's section and vice versa. The open category is open for everyone, so nobody is being excluded. And the female category is there to exclude people because the open category is not fair for half the population. There is paralympics and there are strict rules. You can't just join because one foot is a bit bigger than the other. When rules of categories change drastically, it is not unusual for people to question it and the reasons for them
@@sophiepooks2174 Not that complex. Men and women have different biology. Thinking otherwise is creationism, and denial of evolution.
Weight lifters, chess players, swimmers, cyclists... there's plenty of them. Some are relegated to their correct category now, but not all of them.
And the fact this was a fight at all demonstrates the delusion. You don't get to look around after the war and say "what was the big deal"? Especially with your eyes closed.
I agree and my partner does and she is trans. Not all trans people are obsessed with trans ideology (whatever that means). They are just getting on with their lives.
I think it's more tribalism than religion. Tribalism is banked into our DNA and you have to fight against those instincts. It's normal and even encouraged in society to be against the other team. It definitely mirrors religion - straight down to dogma and belief without evidence but ultimately, it's just my tribe vs. yours.
Agree, however one side does have decades of peer reviewed studies and scientific evidence of such medical conditions being legit and much proof many of the people they condemn as "mentally ill degenerates" have been part of society for a long time, in 1934 the Nazis destroyed all such studies on trans and gender variance at the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft and this is not the first time authoritarians have outlawed and attempted to erase non heterosexuals and gender varients.
Obviously authoritarians and the conservative patriarchy see the existence of transsexuals as a real threat to their power and control of the masses, or else they would not have been spending as much money as the Vatican has spent trying to prove the existence of Christ and many of the biblical artifacts mentioned in it as legitimate.
We are seeing in states of the USA and many other countries slowly embracing authoritarianism the criminalization of healthcare and very self expression of trans folk, to even mention they exist can get a teacher a heavy jail sentence. What an anxious and strange world we live in.
Religion is just a manifestation of tribalism. Shared ritual creates in-group cohesion. Religions were quite literally just "national religions" until the "universal religions" like Christianity, Islam etc. came about (which also have tribalistic function).
I was brought up Catholic, went to Catholic schools, became an atheist through thoughtful discussion with the nuns and other kids in my class. I was 12. This was the era of Hare Krishna, communes, cults, gurus. What I observed was that those brought up with religion tended not to get sucked in by these. Whereas those with no religious tradition at all were more easily duped.
So I think the pathway is
Religion - Reasoned Atheism - No Religion - some immunity to cults
vs
No Religion - vulnerability to cults
I don’t think a return to religion is desirable or even possible. We know to much. But we do need better education for children about cults and ideologies. The pathway for an individual from religion to atheism is normally through self education, discussion, testing of theories. We need to replace that. Not easy given the current heated ideological divides but doable if we take it one step at a time.
The People’s Temple-religious cult.
I wasn’t raised with religion and I haven’t been sucked into any cults. I honestly believe it’s something to do with your brain chemistry.
Everyone anyways has a religion, they just don't always have a name for it.
@@kierasthoughts2480 you and @margaretmm1627 are both right. I wasn't raised with religion, but I got sucked into Catholicism and happily ended up with no religion. The thing is some people are more prone to addictions/ cults than others. I am aware of being in the risk group and thanks to education I know how to avoid being sucked. As an educator, I try to pass my knowledge and experience down to students. I am incredibly grateful to scientists like Richard Dawkins!!!!
Society needs delusion to cope. The important part is not letting that delusion be a vehicle for political tyranny.
Thanks!
Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss are the only rational ones left from the boom of atheism/agnostic movements of the early 2000s.
It's an honour to know his work. It helped me abandon the nonsense Islam is and opened my eyes and mind to a reality worth understanding. However little it is I understand is still just better and I'm so glad both of em haven't budged into the abyss of infinite lunacy of the left.
Many of their peers have left sanity to appease the madness of the masses. Which bloody surprised me.
Shermer is the best
Sam Harris is still alive
This discussion gave me a clearer understanding of crucial contemporary phenomena and of some more general tendencies among humans as well. Thank you!
Ahhh... Richard Dawkins... My childhood hero
What a delightful conversation.
Yes!
After all these years, witnessing Richard Dawkins speak of science and its feats, with a childlike excitement adorning his face, is a sight truly wondrous to embrace.
So thankful to my family for not mucking up my mind with religion and teaching me to demand proof before belief.
Well you mucked up your mind with other thing same shit just different view but you choice what you want I guess
@@masterjose8483 it's choose not choice
so heartening. hope the world produces more and more of richards and peters.
you said dicks and peters ha ha
Richard's mention of Chipping Norton, my old home town, brings a smile to my face. His recent ancestors have a mausoleum attached to the outside north wall of the parish church which has been crumbling behind railings for years and needs doing up in a big way. You're not moving in there are you Richard?!!
Richard Dawkins
I wish I could make these podcasts…. The sound is so bad , this is such nourishing content that needs to be digested late night , therefore warm sound is required 🙏
So happy you are putting as much as you can out there Mr Dawkins, while we still have you here gracing this fine planet! 🙂💫👌
I’m a conservative (theologically) Christian. I appreciate Professor Dawkins airing these conversations. The nuttiness of these days is bringing together an unlikely collection of folks.
I love how Richard Dawkins is aligned with christian nutheads nowadays instead of following how reality actually flows and how it speaks back to us. absurd.
Indeed , I'm with RD on his anti woke stance though I'm Christian.
@@tomgreene1843 cause ur both Christians lol
Christian here too, but with Dawkins (and many other atheists) over the woke brigade. Strange alliance
Indeed it is !@@jameshollands7656
Dr Dawkins I am so pleased to see how well you look! I try to listen to everything you engage. Thank you so much.
The problem with science is that the price of admission is too high. You have to be smart and articulate and study for years to join the discussion. In wokeism all that's needed to join the party is lived experience.
Dawkins is kind of silly to believe that reason and evidence is sufficient for humanity. Humans will always crave a connection to the unknown and the unknowable, hence the intractable existence of religion.
I have been pondering this for a couple of years now. That the rise of atheism did not give rise to an age of reason made me realize that the problem is not theism per se, but is the disregard for evidence, reason, logic and skepticism. I'm not sure how we get past emotion and social pressures being the main driving forces in society. Teaching formal logic in schools might at least a tiny first step.
Pascal sympathizes with the passionate agnostic who struggles daily with the ultimate question of whether God exists.
But the sad fact is that most “nones” and agnostics are not passionate truth-seekers. In the end, far too many think, “Who cares? What does it really matter?
How is this relevant to me? Religion is boring.” .
Intellectual uncertainty is understandable. Indifference to the question of God is insanity.
The new atheists were founding THOUGHT CRIME - i was never fooled it was anti religion.
Formal Logic won't help this agenda. I have a degree in mathematics and it has not changed my faith. Didn't change the faith of Riemann or Euler either. Emotion and social pressures will always be the main driving forces in society. Even Genetically Modified Skeptic's channel is slowly gravitating from atheism to satanism. Am I surprised? No.
David Hume said you can't get an ought from an is. That's why logic and reason and science don't help. They only deal with what exists now. Not with what things ought to be.
I'm not sure if your basic premise is correct. Has there been a rise in atheism? In the UK religion seems alive and well, especially amongst immigrant communities and their UK born children. 300K - 500K immigrants coming into the country annually bringing their religions with them. Maybe it's different in your country.
@@michaelb2388 Your anecdote notwithstanding, a Google search for religious affiliation over the past 100 years would seem to paint a different picture.
You're a good man Richard! Thanks for all the work you've done! I still reckon that one of the most spiritual experiences of my life was reading your "Ancestor's Tale'.
Spiritual?
Yes James. My definition of 'spiritual' is a profound sense of connection - thereby not requiring a deity or religion. Dawkins 'Ancestor's Tale' provided me with that sense of connection through his description of the ancient depth of evolutionary process. @@jameskolar9655
I like Dawkins' analogy. One can conclude many things, among them that the Catholic cannot criticize the transsexual for believing in something that is not because it is scientifically impossible because the Catholic has the same problem. For someone who doesn't believe in those, he can say that they both believe in nonsense.
I am not surprised that the woke will someday has its miracle: that one day a male is pregnant, and raises to the sainthood.
@@onisuryaman408 Trans are the saintly class. They accept 'oppression' willingly in order to disrupt the empire.
The substition hypothesis seems pretty valid because of something most people miss about human nature. As a species we are inherently lazy in thought and deed, following the path of least resistance. Demanding evidence and seeking difficult truths requires discipline which goes against our basic nature. If you want people to be more rigorous about truth then we need a culture that embraces discipline and hard work.
So true, Simon! Freud wrote and spoke a century ago about humanity's tendency to abdicate their personal responsibility by letting others (including institutional religions and religious leaders) make their decisions for them. He, too, longed to see our society grow up and take on the arduous task of rationality.
I witness this myself in my own country. In the battle against religious fanaticism, especially during the heated campaign during the previous presidential election, people used another "religion" which is the national ideology. It is proven later that both ideologies are equally harmful and demonizing their opponents. Both are not capable of rational discussion or thought. And actually, this is just another swing of the same pendulum. Several decades ago, my country was highly nationalistic, and it became very religious in let say 20 years. Now the pendulum is swinging to the nationalistic side again.
Two videos out very close together makes a nice change and both along the same lines..its good to see this this man step up he has a real vioce and a huge fan base..we need men like this to step up.. people really are fighting back
I'm so glad Dr. Richard Dawkins has started TH-cam, and so glad I found this channel. Dr. Dawkins, you're a legend. Hope to see many more videos in the coming weeks, months and years to come.
Agreed 👍 😊
Dr. Dawkins you certainly have NOT wasted your life. Quite the opposite: You have helped establish the argument for the necessity (for a majority subgroup of the population) of belief. People reading your books, watching your countless interviews will have found their place in this "epistemic dichotomy". Thank you for that, Dr. Dawkins. You are much loved!
He's like a saviour isnt it? may be we should build a shrine or something.
Muchísimas gracias. Enhorabuena y seguid así, divulgando, debatiendo y cuestionando desde la razón.
This is the most interesting comparison that I’ve heard in a long time
Thank you Richard for everything. I saw your lecture a few weeks ago at Oxford in the Sheldonian and it was education. will you ever have a podcast where we could submit questions to you?
I don't feel compelled to place religion into my life because I never had it to begin with, but I hear many commenters and people I interact with in the world defend the idea that it's necessary. Which is very strange to me 😂
It seems that picking a side or a tribe is a very well ingrained social adaptation within our species. Religion or other dogma is just way of documenting who/what your side/tribe is/are.
dawkin's face @37:05 - in reference to peter mentioning that the new woke religion that has displaced the Christianity he has fought against all his life - 'and they dont need faith for that' - is the saddest 'yes' I have ever seen.
Yes, RD certainly does inspire us with his intellectual courage, but he also has a lion's share of personal courage, too. How many other public figures continue to speak up for rationality and a secular civil society when they begin to receive threats from the those with whom he does not agree? Dawkins is a tenacious, witty, no nonsense but patient, prolific, dedicated public figure who is changing our world for the better.
Being a devout Roman Catholic does not, should not exclude being witty and clever. 🙂
3:10 He says "deranged, woke beliefs".
That sounds like a description conservative religious people would use.
So from his point of view, belief in anything that doesn't conform to his belief system is automatically "woke and deranged".
Religious people think Secularism, progressiveism, socialism, and atheism are "woke and deranged".
This is a pretty dishonest summation. Quit playing victim. People have different opinions, including those on the left, which Dawkins obviously is. The left used to be about tolerance, but now radical forces are trying to make their radical beliefs mainstream, and agreement with those beliefs is required, or you get cancelled. F that.
Such an important conversation! Thank you!
The need for irrational belief systems is a symptom of underlying psychological dysfunctions; coping strategies for existential deficiencies.
Such as? Care to enlighten us?
@@NSOcarth
Regardless of whether religious objects of worship exist or not, adults seeking worshipful, blind subservience to anyone is dangerously irresponsible on top of being pathetic. It's the same impulse behind those following human cult leaders, and is no better when directed towards any supposed deity.
@@sophiepooks2174
Such as needing blind, dogmatic faith in an ideology to fill a void of meaning in one's life. A desperate need to abdicate moral responsibility for one's self to some external authority. Etc.
Tell us all Kimani what you believe in? What is your coping strategy for your existential deficiencies? Einstein wrote about his beliefs concerning Science and Religion and I wouldn't characterize him as irrational or having an irrational belief system.
@@NSOcarth Why? Because he's irrational? 😂🤣😂
I get that a lot too. Because I’m opposed to woke I must support MAGA or vice versa, depending on which cult I’m addressing at the time. Actually, I’m opposed to both because I don’t care for irrational extremism. I prefer evidence based rationality instead of fear and hate. But society is so polarized and it seems like many people struggle to think broader than two.
Richard, I can't say whether or not the substitution hypothesis is correct or not. My belief is that for some people it is true and others it is not.
What I do know for a fact is that not only has your work in evolutionary biology had a profound impact on our society, but your work in atheism and driving people to think critically profoundly helped me leave Islam.
And although that period of my life was arduous and painful, your work is what made it easy.
There are plenty of people who leave toxic dogmas and belief systems that then go on to live a life of critical thinking. Even if it is true that other substitute it for other misguided beliefs.
Whenever I meet other like-minded people who have left various religions, they always know the name Richard Dawkins.
You are an intellectual hero.
You are so damn brave,this honestly makes me smile. Seeing people understanding Dawkins and finding themselves again.
In bacteriology, we recognize that the vast legions of bacteria on (say) a kitchen countertop are benign to humans. Excessive use of antibacterials everywhere tend to result in a elimination of all populations of bacteria leaving those surfaces to be recolonized (inevitably) by bacterial colonies that turn out to be much more harmful to humans.
Alternately, we could use a viral inoculant metaphor; that the presence of benign ideas to 'fill that memetic space in peoples' heads' armors them against more toxic, virulent ideas.
Fascinating talk, thank you.
Thank you thank you thank you that’s all I can say!! You are both great men who we NEED these days. Thank you!
I'm from Sweden and are here in TH-cam a little more than my friends. The problem about sexes in the US and Great Britain seems not be a problem at all here. When I talk about it to my friends, they look completely zeroed, wondering what I'm talking about. So I'm wondering... is it really something an average person in the US/Great Britain is talking about outside social media? I understand that it's a real problem for example about that guy who won in the swimming contest for women, or that rapist who claimed he was a woman ...but here we never heard about it or similar cases. This is not something our news seems to bother about. Could it be that this is a non-issue that is completely exaggerated and only fueled by social media, in social media? or is it only I who are fed all this films about the subject by the algoritm because I think its really strange and therefor interesting?
Here in California the problem of the sexes is something that the media, the schools, and the government is forcing down our throats. It is not something we think about or talk about in real life except when it affects us directly. Parents who have children in school (thank God my children are adults) are fighting because their children are being taught that they can change their sex. Women in sports are fighting when a man pretending to be a woman enters the sport. Some 15 years ago California declared all public bathrooms unisex and for a while stores that had public bathrooms went along with it. The idea died away because people like me, who needed to use a bathroom in the middle of shopping, cancelled shopping and just went home to use their own "safe, no man lurking inside" bathroom. The Netherlands just decided that a very ugly pretend woman to be Miss Netherlands.
I live in Austria and it's definitely an issue here too. Everywhere, but especially in educational institutions. There are several "trans kids" in nearly every classroom now. In reality they usually are autistic or have mental health conditions. Or, they're just alternative teens who would have been goth, emo, punk etc. in the 90s. Often, they dye their hair blue. I doubt it's not a problem in Sweden. But most people outside of these institutions don't realize/notice it.
Being "attractive" has nothing to do with the discussion though.
@@valerianmandrake Sorry that I got a little emotional, it just annoys me how the gender activists have such a holier than thou attitude. I wonder if they understand how their outrageous claims engender disdain and hatred. I saw a discussion where someone was justifying death threats because of misgendering. The vitriol they spew while talking about "inclusivity" is so hypocritical.
I'm in the UK.
I was served by a bearded man wearing a dress in a very large department store. (Totally inappropriate behaviour around children IMO and he looked ridiculous).
The lady in front of me said loudly, "us women have to stick together".
I could have kissed her!
So no, it is very real but in my experience anyway, very rare.
Incidentally, a supermarket chain during "pride" month festooned their shops with flags and bunting. Literally, pushing this in our faces.
Unfortunately, it's not restricted to the online world of social media.
@@simonshee5155 I really don't have a problem with a man wearing a dress. A man can dress however he wants. He can even have a female name. But he cant claim he is a biological woman saying he know how it is to be a woman, because he can't.
We need science, evidence and truth. Biological sex is more important than hurt feelings.we need to think for ourselves,independently on the facts.
I don't need to be woke either. Maybe I am just a wise 62 year old woman.
@evil_duck6405 Christopher Hitchens?
Woke means awake/aware of social injustice, there is a book called 'a dictionary' amazing how you can live on this planet for 62 years and not realize how dumb what you just said sounds.
Nope, I reject your entire silly statement. Go do your Wokey Pokey.@@sophiepooks2174
@@sophiepooks2174 do one.
Fantastic conversation, thank you both!
Richard Dawkins is a person who I would love to sit down with and discuss the universe.
We also need common sense!! Great discussion
Teach science approach in school not just scientific subjects. Even though I was taught math, physics,biology and chemistry from being 13 years old I did not grasp the idea of the scientific method until university.
That's a very good point
Great show!🎸
I have personally come to the substitution hypothesis (though I haven't referred to it as such), and I have flocked to Christianity in response, but I have still gained a lot from Richard Dawkins and I thank God for people like him. I appreciate the principles to which he has dedicated himself and I value the curiosity and awe he exhibits and inspires
I was raised in the church but always questioned it. By high school, i called myself a non-believer. This was 1969. To me, it was transcendent.
This channel is so incredibly refreshingly intelligent. It's almost calming and centering to listen to genuine facts void of emotions. Intellectually stimulating and grounding simultaneously. I'm grateful to you sir.
Great conversation. The way you both approach the thought of the matter was interesting to see.
Largely fair enough but the conversation could have touched on so-called intersex individuals, i.e. females who develop with male physical characteristics/males with female ones. How are these people supposed to interact with culture/the world and if surgery is deemed a solution, where lies the boundary for intervention?
Irrelevant. Intersex people (people with DSD) have literally nothing to do with trans ideology, and have been coopted by trans rights activists in an attempt to legitimise their metaphysical claims.
Also, people with DSD still have a sex. They just have medical conditions related to this sex, ie only men can have Klinefelter syndrome.
DSD people with noticeable symptoms are a tiny minority, they are accommodated in society, and do not cause any issues.
99.999% of transidentified people do not have a DSD, although they sure would like to because in their mind it would make them more valid. Which is pathetic. Again, DSD is not a fun third sex, it means that people have a serious medical condition.
Intersex is a birth defect.
Why? Intersex people do have a sex. And they are a very small percent of the population. You're making a logical fallacy.
@@SchroderCat : if you think that's a logical fallacy you need to get back in your box.
they have only 1 set of gametes no matter what physical anomalies they might have, those people interact with culture/the world based on their gametes
Professor Dawkins, you mention that ‘whites inherit the sin of slavery’. Recently I watched a TH-cam video on ‘Facts about slavery not taught in school’ by Thomas Sowell. From this it seems that while it’s true that whites participated in slavery (as did most other races), not only was it both as master AND slave, it was also more due to intervention by whites that so much of slavery has been abolished. I admit I have not researched the claims presented but they all seem to me to be logical and valid. How much race hate do you think would be reduced if it were more widely known that blacks enslaved blacks and whites enslaved whites along with most other peoples of the world?
We need to teach verification. You can't unconvince someone with facts or evidence, who have been convinced by emotion.
Although I don't dismiss out of hand the 'replacement theory' I find it a bit too convenient. Many European countries (including the UK) have always been more secular than the U.S. I think you have to look farther to find an explanation for a U.S. generation's lack of belief f(which has always been lower than Europe's). It seems people are taking as the standard, the decrease in the U.S. population's belief in religion, to be the indicator of the rest of the world's beliefs. The religiosity of Sweden has always been lower than the U.S. Why haven't the Swedish then, always been more woke? We have more work to do, it seems to me, to find some institutional appeal to the origin of 'wokeness'.
Not always. Certainly the U.S. has had higher levels of religiosity for the past 100-120 years. I’m not sure that always holds in the 19th century or before.
The Victorian era was quite evangelical; Prior to the 1850’s, Catholics, Jews, and Atheists could not be seated in the House of Commons.
The prohibition on any established religion in the U.S. Constitution stands in stark contrast.
For what it’s worth, I truly admire the British Constitution (and it’s evolution), as well as the remarkable political efficacy of it’s people.
how is Sweden NOT woke? it was one of the first to embrace the ideology, fortunately recently they started to backtrack
I remember reading an article several years ago that showed that the decline of religion among Millennials could be directly tied to the perceived homophobia coming from religious people in the country during the debate on whether gays could serve in the military and whether guys could marry and other issues pertaining to gay rights. In other words, Millennials did NOT reject religion for reasons of embracing rationality, they rejected it because of the VALUES they saw religion promoting. If this is true then it shouldn't be surprising that many of them embraced an alternative system of irrational beliefs like some of the beliefs associated with "wokism". Rationality doesn't appear to have ever been their goal. Otherwise people with this worldview would not be so unwilling to hold their beliefs up to scrutiny.
I read a few of your books back in high school and I enjoyed them all. They gave me a new light into life and I’m forever grateful.
Now this TH-cam channel is the good news all of us rational beings have been waiting for.
THANK YOU❤
Mr. Dawkins, I read your mother's poems. They are delightful, and on her dog. I had a cat for 17.5 years, Smokey, Siamese. And I agree with your mother, Smokey was a person. I really enjoy the subjects you discuss on religion, gender, the poetry of reality, trans and so on.
Oh my goodness, I used to be a professional musician, and spent many happy hours making music in a recording studio in Chipping Norton. Would that Prof Dawkins had visited us during one of our sessions he would have been a most welcome guest, especially by me.
Richard is a national treasure
Thank you Richard Dawkins, for these two recent podcasts. Both were highly enjoyable and I'm hoping there will be many more to come.
I am not a professional biologist, geneticist, or scientist of any sort, simply someone who has had a keen interest in science from an early age and loves to read scientific literature. Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World" and your "Blind Watchmaker" are two of the most important and influential books I have ever read. That being said, I have for about a decade now had a theory (anecdotal of course) about religion and conservative thought in general vs. atheism/agnosticism and skeptical thinking in general.
HEADS UP! IT'S GENETIC!
I've come to the conclusion that they appear to be hard wired. Not one simple gene of course, but that humans have a range of them, inherited randomly from both parents, and depending on which combination you get, you fall on a spectrum. More "Left" genes and you tend to be liberal and more open to science. More "Right" genes and you tend to be more conservative and less skeptical about certain types of things. A general mix and you wind up essentially a political centrist that may or may not lean a little more to one side or the other.
I realize this sounds overly simplistic, but there seems to me to be a lot of (again, anecdotal) evidence for it. Among the biggest examples are western democracies. No matter which country you look at, no matter where in the world, no matter their level of education and relative wealth, they're always split somewhere near the middle. Assuming they are a true democracy where the people are free to vote their conscience, there's nearly always a real question which party will come out better in the next election. Even if one side is favored for a period of time, it will inevitably swing the other way eventually. I'm not aware of any countries where 80% of the population is liberal and conservatives never have a chance, or vice versa. In general, (again we're talking about real, truly free democracies here) populations tend to be 30-40% one way, 30-40% the other and 20-30% floating in the middle.
My own personal example would be my family. My father enjoyed the findings of science (we both breathlessly watched Cosmos together in 1980), and wasn't especially big on religion. My mother was a hard core evangelical, Bible thumping, Southern Baptist Christian who could not care less about science of any sort and literally thought "evolution" was a dirty word. My brother and I grew up in the same house, with the same parents with essentially identical circumstances. I turned out ultimately to be a science nerd, politically left of center and an atheist. My brother turned out to be a religious right-wing conservative MAGA nut job. Ugh. My brother most certainly isn't unintelligent, just wired differently. I'm sure many in your audience have had similar experiences, or at the very least know others that have.
So, environment doesn't seem to be the issue. And intelligence and education doesn't seem to have anything to do with it either. For example, Francis Collins. A brilliant, highly educated, world renowned geneticist, who led the Human Genome Project and yet deeply believes Jesus Christ is the son of god and is his personal savior. All those brains, and yet still gullible to the mysterious and ineffable. Another famous example would be Joe Rogan. I know many think he is a right-wing nut, but he really isn't. If one listens to him for any length of time, you'll see he's very liberal on most things. He's an atheist, who is very intelligent, scientifically curious and loves getting deep into actual science issues like how man-made climate change is real. Yet if he has someone on his show talking about aliens/UFOs, or how taking psychedelics might connect you to the cosmos, he's all in on that too.
My point with those two examples is education and intelligence or the lack thereof doesn't seem to be the answer as to whether someone raised religiously winds up continuing to believe in god as opposed to outgrowing it. Some people are just hard wired to think there is more to the universe than what we can see or test for in a lab. That may be why some people who are ultimately able to break free from religion seem more susceptible to grabbing on to some other form of nonsense to fill the void. They're not dumb, or uneducated. It doesn't matter how much they learn, they're genetically programmed to "Believe" in something.
This set of genes (if it exists) would explain why two effectively identical members of the human species can receive the same information, yet process it differently and literally have no idea how the other came to the opposite conclusion. And why it seems that no amount of effort or education will ever completely erase one side or the other from the equation.
As a science nerd, naturally I grew up watching Star Trek. I used to think in my younger years that even if such fanciful things as transporters or warp drives never actually came about, that eventually in a couple hundred years or so, the general theme of a future with no religion and no war might actually be possible. Ah youth. After slowly coming to the conclusion that political and religious tendencies are hard wired to one degree or other, I no longer think that's possible. Our great, great, great, etc., grandchildren will still be going to the polls trying to make sure that the dirty bastard from the other party doesn't make it into office! Especially because they believe (or don't) in Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, or whoever the hell. And xenophobia (racism) which is part of out evolutionary heritage will still be around too.
I would love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks again for the great podcasts. What a shame Hitch isn't around to be on your show.
Cheers,
Keenan
It's funny that you mention Star Trek. There was an episode that was about going to an Earth that was under the oppression of the Romans and that's because in that timeline Jesus' influence only spread to a handful of believers. Star Trek never celebrated atheism. That's because science and religion aren't mutually exclusive. Those fields can overlap.
I agree with you that religion is more hard wired into people then others. However, we all believe in things that we can't prove. I assume that you believe all humans have inherit moral worth, yet you didn't come to that conclusion from looking into a microscope. If you look at the field of theology, a lot of rigorous thought goes into it. It's not the case that atheists are closer to the truth because theists hate science. Both sides love science when it's convenient and hate it when it's inconvenient.
Speaking of the scientific method, if affirmation significantly reduces suicide, the highest rates of trans-related suicides should occur outside of the western world. What is the trans suicide rate per capita in Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Mexico? What was the number of trans-related suicides per capita in the US for each decade from 1950 to 2023? Are we seeing the lowest rates ever at the moment? Would such investigative studies be welcome in gender studies class, or would it get one canceled 😂?
So, the best way to reduce trans-related suicides is to forbid any social acknowledgement and legal support to people who face this issue, and threat it as an illness (or a sin) as it has been traditionally approached.
On the other hand, I find it very dissapointing that people consider such a tragic problem as something funny.
It doesn't reduce suicide, because trans is not the underlying cause. They're not suicidal because they're trans, they adopt a trans identity in response to their existing anxieties and depressions. There is no statistical difference between suicide of trans-claiming kids and kids with anxiety, depression, trauma, etc. It's exactly the same proportion, which demonstrates the reality.
It would not be welcome. Anything which quantifies or tries to explain with biology will not be looked upon kindly, as it means "science" will come up with a way of performing "conversion therapy" on trans. They want you to just accept their claim unquestioningly. The fact this contradicts their bogus "trans brain" claim, and the fact they want drugs and surgeries is irrelevant. That's the religiosity.
Not at all compelling. I think your first question is actually quite easy to answer: if there was a person who committed suicide in any of those countries you mentioned because they were trans, we probably would not know it. Hell, they might not even know it. The suicide would simply be attributed to some other cause.
This should sound familiar, because this is akin to people talking about how autism rates are the highest they've ever been, or how there are more gay people than there have ever been. It's probable that neither of these things are true. 50 years ago, we didn't have the tools to diagnose autism to the extent we do today... so people who were actually autistic were never diagnosed. 50 years ago, being gay in the US was substantially more dangerous than it is today, so many gay people chose to hide.
As long as death remains unknown we will fill the void with “religion” to compensate for it.
One virgin birth v men having babies - which is a more harmful belief?
I don't worry about the substitution hypothesis. The way I see it, people don't have a deep psychological need for religion. They do have a deep need for community, purpose, meaning, mental comfort etc. Religion is only 1 possible means to obtain those ends.
True, but it is normally the one folks like to go to first, and suggest to others, something I find annoying. There are YT channels telling people to go to church to make friends. True, one may meet others, but not people one has much if anything in common with. There is a difference between being alone and being lonely. And, if one helps others one also helps oneself.
As long as there is suffering in the world there will be religion. Academics also suffer from their own ivory tower delusions thinking that by simply instilling critical thinking skills all will be right with the world, not realizing that malnutrition, violence & a whole host of other pathologies need to be addressed before this is even possible. I find that many academics have a callousness toward the underprivileged. What would you do if you were daily on the brink of death, wish for a better world or develop your critical thinking skills?
I love this coveration but I just can't stand the background noise, it's a particular frequency that is giving me a headache
This irritates me too! I'm a TERF AND I HAVE VOTED LEFT ALL MY LIFE. Neither am I a racist.
Most gender ideologues are privileged people of Anglo-Saxon heritage. Their racism accusations are bogus.
Such a huge fan of Richard Dawkins, and I was thoroughly impressed with the conversation that was had with Helen Joyce. Very much looking forward to any and all upcoming conversations!
This ‘professor of philosophy’ came across to me as distinctly light weight.
No! He's being very Very deliberate
42:17
Richard: Darwin solved the problem of creation in biology...
Peter: Is there anything we dont understand in Biology..
Richard: Yes, how it started
😂
Do you not understand the difference between evolution and Abiogenesis?
@@ThePresident001 Do you not understand what creation in biology was solved means?
@oOFedoOo Yes, evolution explains the diversity of life. Your original c9mment seems to conflate something else with this.
@@ThePresident001 watch the timestamp then read my comment.
Thats true people follow tribes even if they dont truly believe in what it stands for, ive seen that all my life. I feel its to do with being outcasted or something bad will happen to them
The tribe of atheist 🤣🤣
I think Monty Python effectively dealt with male pregnancy years ago: "Well you can't have a baby. Where's fetus gonna gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?"
Great conversation. But guys, there is a phone near some tech that gives a very distracting high pitch zoom.